Israel defends itself?

[The Rabbi]

It looks like Israel defended itself from an 18 month old infant in the last day or so.

Six members of the same family and an 18-month-old infant boy were killed when an Israeli airstrike hit the Jebaliya refugee camp in the early morning hours, according to Gaza police and health officials. Twenty others were injured in the strike, they said, and rescuers were digging through the rubble of flattened homes, looking for survivors.

AOL.com Article - Israeli fire hits UN facility in Gaza, killing 7

War is hell.

 

[Claudette]

It looks like Israel defended itself from an 18 month old infant in the last day or so.

Six members of the same family and an 18-month-old infant boy were killed when an Israeli airstrike hit the Jebaliya refugee camp in the early morning hours, according to Gaza police and health officials. Twenty others were injured in the strike, they said, and rescuers were digging through the rubble of flattened homes, looking for survivors.

AOL.com Article - Israeli fire hits UN facility in Gaza, killing 7

War is hell.

Yes it is and always has been.

People die during war but it seems like some on this board think anyone killed is murdered.

Of course only the Jews murder. Hamas, well, people just die.

 

[The Rabbi]

It looks like Israel defended itself from an 18 month old infant in the last day or so.

War is hell.

Yes it is and always has been.

People die during war but it seems like some on this board think anyone killed is murdered.

Of course only the Jews murder. Hamas, well, people just die.

Like no child was ever killed in collateral damage in any other war.
In a sense thats true, because when Palestinians kill children, their own or Israelis, it is intentional, not merely collateral.

 

[Mustang]

No. Any miniscule amount they spend on the people is to keep the people voting for Hamas.

Those idiots voted Hamas into power and they are now paying the price for letting those dirtbags run things.

In America, elected politicians routinely tout how they "bring home the bacon" in order to maintain the support of the voters and various influential voting blocks. This is nothing new anywhere on the planet where elections decide the outcome of who serves in a legislative body.

You realy think Hamas, a terrorist organization, is the equivalent of the Democrats here? You mugh be right though

Unlike conservatives, I don't live in some kind of wholly black and white world where everyone and everything can be defined as being one thing and one thing only.

Every political organization has an agenda. That agenda generally includes multiple goals. One of those goals is to perpetuate its power and influence. To that end, it does what it thinks is necessary to pursue those goals.

My understanding is that Hamas came to power because it essentially split the vote for various PLO candidates. Once they were in power, they understood that they had to meet the needs of the people which just so happen to be numerous since they have so little and generally live in poverty and squallor with mulitple generations growing up in refugee camps etc. So, you're damn right that they were responsive to the needs of the people who had the power to vote them out of power if their daily conditions worsened.

They also had a political goal which is the establishment of a Palestinian State. That just so happens to be a goal that the Israeli gov't seems to be in no hurry to make a reality despite statements to the contrary.

Now, IF both sides negotiated in good faith, things might be different. But I think there's ample evidence that BOTH sides have not negotiated in good faith in the past, rarely at the same time at least. That's a recipe for conflict which is exactly what we have. Alas, it's a confict between two completely mismatched combatants with a poor and poorly armed Palestinian population which is in the majority fighting against a wealthy and well-armed Jewish minority. What we're seeing is the end result.

But the Israelis are hardly blameless in all of this despite the fact that some people in the West want to paint them as the victims. Israel has been and at times continues to be an occupying power (in the West Bank, at least) and subjugates the will of the local population and subjects them to all manner of indignities on a daily basis. Considering all the bellyaching that conservatives do in this country concerning Obama and the Democrats, it would be interesting to witness what conservatives in this country would say if Obama and the Federal gov't treated red state Republicans the way Israelis treat Palestinians because I have absolutely no doubt in my mind that it would create an insurgency right here in the good ol' USA as conservatives would take up arms instead of just complaining on talk radio.

So, to answer your question... Yeah, I think that Hamas is doing what it has to do in order to hold on to the support of the people. Maybe that will change at some point if the people come to believe that the attack on Gaza wouldn't have happened if Hamas had been more moderate. But it was the failure of moderation which lead to the ascendancy of Hamas in the first place because Israel was usually not negotiating in good faith, and the failure of moderation led to a radicalization of the population and more extremist elements started to win the support of the people.

As for me, my guess is that the killings of all the Palestinian civilians will probaby just harden Palestinian radicalism which plays right into the hands of Hamas. If that's true, than Israel is it's own worst enemy becaue, through their actions, the Israelis are proving that engagment doesn't lead to results; it only leads to more Jewish settlement in occupied lands and continued crackdowns on the Palestinian people which also includes the deaths of women and children.

 

[Lakhota]

Jeremy Scahill: 'We've Hit All-Time Lows' In Media Coverage Of Gaza

"We could say this every time I come on your show and talk to you: we've hit all-time lows with media coverage in this country," Scahill told Minkovski. "When you look at what's happening right now in Gaza, this is a massive massacre and one epic series of war crime after war crime, child after child being killed."

Scahill went on to say that "Israeli propagandists are largely given carte blanche to say what they want on American television with very little pushback."

More: Jeremy Scahill On U.S. Media Coverage Of Israel-Gaza Conflict: 'We've Hit All-Time Lows'

I agree. There is no doubt that media coverage is biased in favor of Israel.

 

[Mustang]

War is hell.

Yes it is and always has been.

People die during war but it seems like some on this board think anyone killed is murdered.

Of course only the Jews murder. Hamas, well, people just die.

Like no child was ever killed in collateral damage in any other war.
In a sense thats true, because when Palestinians kill children, their own or Israelis, it is intentional, not merely collateral.

First of all, this is not a war with two relatively equal sides engaging in hostilities across a border. This is a complete mismatch where a very powerful military is beating up on a local population that's poorly armed.

But regardless of that reality, an academic argument about how the history of warfare leads to civilian casualities is not a defense nor a justification for the death of civilians when those deaths can be avoided in the first place. Instead, it's just a lame excuse that doesn't fool anyone who's not already an Israeli apologist.

 

[Claudette]

Yes it is and always has been.

People die during war but it seems like some on this board think anyone killed is murdered.

Of course only the Jews murder. Hamas, well, people just die.

Like no child was ever killed in collateral damage in any other war.
In a sense thats true, because when Palestinians kill children, their own or Israelis, it is intentional, not merely collateral.

First of all, this is not a war with two relatively equal sides engaging in hostilities across a border. This is a complete mismatch where a very powerful military is beating up on a local population that's poorly armed.

But regardless of that reality, an academic argument about how the history of warfare leads to civilian casualities is not a defense nor a justification for the death of civilians when those deaths can be avoided in the first place. Instead, it's just a lame excuse that doesn't fool anyone who's not already an Israeli apologist.

Oh and how can they be avoided?? Just let Hames rain rockets down on Isreal and Isreal just let their people be killed??

Doubt thats gonna happen.

War isn't fair and never has been. He who has the arms, the manpower and the will to win will win.

In this case Hamas has dug itself a hole and filled it with fodder. Palestinians.

 

[RandallFlagg]

Before I start in on this thread, let me preface it by mentioning a variation of an old saying:

"We won the battle, but lost the war."​

Struggles and armed conflicts aren't just fought on a battlefield. They're fought in the court of public opinion too. In case anyone needs a history lesson on that front, it would behoove them to recall the American Civil Rights struggle. It was news images of water cannons and German Shepherd police dogs being unleashed on peaceful Black demonstrators which ultimately turned American public opinion against the gov'ts of the American South in the early 1960s. Israel faces a similar PR disaster despite the fact that most of these kind of reports don't get much airtime in the USA.

In truth, the story below isn't even the one I was looking for. I saw a report this morning on CNN about a 3 year old Palestinian child who was wrapped in bandages in a hospital. Obviously, the story below is from last month.

A Palestinian child, 7 years old, Ali Abed al-Awour, passed away last night as a result of injuries caused by an Israeli airstrike last Wednesday.

Palestinian sources reported that the child was with his uncle, Muhammad Ahmad al-Awour, on a motorcycle, when the Israeli airplane striked in the al-Sudanyeh neighborhood, northern Gaza. The Israeli army claimed that the uncle was a leader of Hamas, responsible for firing rockets to southern Israel. However, al-Awour's family said he had gone out to get food for dinner when he was killed.

This attack caused the immediate death of the uncle, 30 years old, and two other people were injured. One of them was Ali al-Awour, who passed away yesterday in a hospital in Gaza.

7-year old dies in Gaza 3 days after being injured in an Israeli airstrike

The POINT is clear as long as you're not too obtuse to see it or too partisan to acknowledge it. When a militarily far more powerful foe launches a military assault on a weaker opponent in the name of self-defense, it better be careful regarding its targets and the scale of its assault, or it's going to look like plain old brutality.

While I know that there are a lot of Israel supporter who are unapologetic regarding these assaults, at some point you have to ask yourself if it's doing more harm than good to the cause if it creates widespread sympathy for the Palestinians in the court of world public opinion in the process.

But this thread is not meant so much to be about Israel versus the Palestinians and who's right, or who's MORE right. This thread is meant to be about what's in America's interest. You see, the Israelis are using weapons systems that WE supplied to them to launch these military campaigns. Think how that makes Arabs view us when they see dead children at the hands of weapons we supplied to the people who are using the weapons against them. Think that might create a terrorism problem for us in the process?

OK. Let's break this down to it's "elementary" functions - since you seem incapable of understanding the facts here.


Let me come to YOUR neighborhood and set up thousands of Katusha rockets. Do you know what a Katusha is? It is like firing a bottle rocketk and hoping to hell it hits SOMETHING - difference between a Katusha and a bottle rocket? The Katusha has a 28 pound explosive charge on it. It kills indiscriminately.

The ONLY reason more Israelis have NOT been killed is that the populace is well trained and has sought shelter during the nearly 5,000 rocket attacks.

Now, to the "other side". You know, that "side" that liberals love so damned much. What do they do? They hide their rockets in civilian areas, in schools and hospitals and in Nurseries and in UN provided schools. They hide them in Mosques.

Next. BEFORE Israel went into Gaza to clean out this terrorist vermin, they made phone calls to the palestinians, they dropped leaflets, they texted, they announced on radio, television, the internet and even Facebook. Warning them that they were coming. WEEKS BEFORE anything happened.

Now, back to YOU. I have began firing thousands of rockets into YOUR neighborhood. All day, all night. Over and over and over and over. Your neighbors and your friends have been killed and wounded and maybe even YOUR house has been destroyed..

I assume that you would stand back then and do nothing? After all, I am weak and helpless and to "retaliate" would be "inhuman".

Make up your mind. Either you have a right to defend yourself, or you don't. What is it going to be?

 

[RandallFlagg]

It looks like Israel defended itself from an 18 month old infant in the last day or so.

War is hell.

Yes it is and always has been.

People die during war but it seems like some on this board think anyone killed is murdered.

Of course only the Jews murder. Hamas, well, people just die.

Remember the mantra of the Left - The ends justify the means.......

 

[Slyhunter]

Yes it is and always has been.

People die during war but it seems like some on this board think anyone killed is murdered.

Of course only the Jews murder. Hamas, well, people just die.

Like no child was ever killed in collateral damage in any other war.
In a sense thats true, because when Palestinians kill children, their own or Israelis, it is intentional, not merely collateral.

First of all, this is not a war with two relatively equal sides engaging in hostilities across a border. This is a complete mismatch where a very powerful military is beating up on a local population that's poorly armed.

But regardless of that reality, an academic argument about how the history of warfare leads to civilian casualities is not a defense nor a justification for the death of civilians when those deaths can be avoided in the first place. Instead, it's just a lame excuse that doesn't fool anyone who's not already an Israeli apologist.

So the weaker side should unconditionally surrender and sue for peace. That is the way it works.

 

[Mustang]

Like no child was ever killed in collateral damage in any other war.
In a sense thats true, because when Palestinians kill children, their own or Israelis, it is intentional, not merely collateral.

First of all, this is not a war with two relatively equal sides engaging in hostilities across a border. This is a complete mismatch where a very powerful military is beating up on a local population that's poorly armed.

But regardless of that reality, an academic argument about how the history of warfare leads to civilian casualities is not a defense nor a justification for the death of civilians when those deaths can be avoided in the first place. Instead, it's just a lame excuse that doesn't fool anyone who's not already an Israeli apologist.

So the weaker side should unconditionally surrender and sue for peace. That is the way it works.

There never would have been an America with your attitude.

 

[The Rabbi]

Yes it is and always has been.

People die during war but it seems like some on this board think anyone killed is murdered.

Of course only the Jews murder. Hamas, well, people just die.

Like no child was ever killed in collateral damage in any other war.
In a sense thats true, because when Palestinians kill children, their own or Israelis, it is intentional, not merely collateral.

First of all, this is not a war with two relatively equal sides engaging in hostilities across a border. This is a complete mismatch where a very powerful military is beating up on a local population that's poorly armed.

But regardless of that reality, an academic argument about how the history of warfare leads to civilian casualities is not a defense nor a justification for the death of civilians when those deaths can be avoided in the first place. Instead, it's just a lame excuse that doesn't fool anyone who's not already an Israeli apologist.

Unequal? You mean like the US and the Taliban? A war in which plenty of children were also killed as collateral damage.
You seem to think these deaths are avoidable by Israel. What do you think Israel should do to make that happen I mean other than surrender to Hamas.

 

[Mustang]

Like no child was ever killed in collateral damage in any other war.
In a sense thats true, because when Palestinians kill children, their own or Israelis, it is intentional, not merely collateral.

First of all, this is not a war with two relatively equal sides engaging in hostilities across a border. This is a complete mismatch where a very powerful military is beating up on a local population that's poorly armed.

But regardless of that reality, an academic argument about how the history of warfare leads to civilian casualities is not a defense nor a justification for the death of civilians when those deaths can be avoided in the first place. Instead, it's just a lame excuse that doesn't fool anyone who's not already an Israeli apologist.

Unequal? You mean like the US and the Taliban? A war in which plenty of children were also killed as collateral damage.
You seem to think these deaths are avoidable by Israel. What do you think Israel should do to make that happen I mean other than surrender to Hamas.

Do we have a common border with Afghanistan?

Israel isn't even making a real attempt to avoid civilian casualties as both the death toll and their locations prove.

 

[The Rabbi]

First of all, this is not a war with two relatively equal sides engaging in hostilities across a border. This is a complete mismatch where a very powerful military is beating up on a local population that's poorly armed.

But regardless of that reality, an academic argument about how the history of warfare leads to civilian casualities is not a defense nor a justification for the death of civilians when those deaths can be avoided in the first place. Instead, it's just a lame excuse that doesn't fool anyone who's not already an Israeli apologist.

Unequal? You mean like the US and the Taliban? A war in which plenty of children were also killed as collateral damage.
You seem to think these deaths are avoidable by Israel. What do you think Israel should do to make that happen I mean other than surrender to Hamas.

Do we have a common border with Afghanistan?

Israel isn't even making a real attempt to avoid civilian casualties as both the death toll and their locations prove.

1) Irrelevant.
2) Of course they are making an attempt. The death toll and locations speak to Hamas callousness in locating their military installations near or in civilian population center.
This has been explained to you many times over. What about do you still not get?

 

[Mustang]

Unequal? You mean like the US and the Taliban? A war in which plenty of children were also killed as collateral damage.
You seem to think these deaths are avoidable by Israel. What do you think Israel should do to make that happen I mean other than surrender to Hamas.

Do we have a common border with Afghanistan?

Israel isn't even making a real attempt to avoid civilian casualties as both the death toll and their locations prove.

1) Irrelevant.
2) Of course they are making an attempt. The death toll and locations speak to Hamas callousness in locating their military installations near or in civilian population center.
This has been explained to you many times over. What about do you still not get?

The following argument doesn't wash with me in the least:

"Of course we were trying to prevent civilian casualties. If we hadn't been, 10,000 civilians would have died instead of only 1,000."
​

The US couldn't make that argument about the fire-bombing of Dresden in WWII no matter how hard it tried, and Israel is foolish it it thinks most people buy that kind of pseudo-logic. They damn well know civilians are going to die, and they're allowing it to happen thinking of it as retribution and that they're teaching the Palestinians a lesson in the process. They're teaching them a lesson alright. They're teaching them that revenge is a dish best served cold.

 

[Indeependent]

Do we have a common border with Afghanistan?

Israel isn't even making a real attempt to avoid civilian casualties as both the death toll and their locations prove.

1) Irrelevant.
2) Of course they are making an attempt. The death toll and locations speak to Hamas callousness in locating their military installations near or in civilian population center.
This has been explained to you many times over. What about do you still not get?

The following argument doesn't wash with me in the least:

"Of course we were trying to prevent civilian casualties. If we hadn't been, 10,000 civilians would have died instead of only 1,000."
​

If that argument doesn't wash with you, you must smell something awful.​

 

[M.D. Rawlings]

Humanitarian law huh?

Gee not much said about all the Isreali's killed by Hamas and their rockets and suicide bombers. Guess that doesn't come under "humanitarian law."

Claiming moral outrage when violence is directed at you while attempting to absolve yourself of moral responsibility when your own side engages in atrocities is a losing argument because it's easily recognized as hypocritical. You simply can't have it both ways no matter how you try to convince yourself that you can. If the violence directed at you is immoral when it kills civilians, the violence you direct at the other side is also immoral when it kills civilians on the other side. Likewise, any claim you make to protecting yourself and fighting for a just cause can be made by the other side as well.

It's this fact that makes conservatives' argument to being "principled" such a joke as far as I'm concerned simply because they're ALWAYS trying to play both sides of the moral outrage fence; on the one hand, they're outraged at the violence directed at Israel, and on the other hand, they're outraged when anyone dares to suggest that Israel might actually be in the wrong when they engage in military operations which end up killing large numbers of civilians, including innocent women and children. That kind of simplistic sophistry doesn't impress me in the least, and I don't buy it any more than a lot of other people who see it for exactly what it is: total BS.

Lefty's like that crazed and deformed aunt (the obscenity-spouting elephant girl) whom one might hide away from the neighbors in one's basement for most of the year and only briefly let out, though tethered to a chain, for spring cleanings. Fortified by a stiff shot of whiskey and wearing a face shield to protect the eyes from errant sprays of spittle, one would then drive her back into the dark recesses with a cattle prod while the eldest son stood by with a double-barreled shotgun . . . just in case the old battle-ax broke free of its bonds.

 

[Slyhunter]

First of all, this is not a war with two relatively equal sides engaging in hostilities across a border. This is a complete mismatch where a very powerful military is beating up on a local population that's poorly armed.

But regardless of that reality, an academic argument about how the history of warfare leads to civilian casualities is not a defense nor a justification for the death of civilians when those deaths can be avoided in the first place. Instead, it's just a lame excuse that doesn't fool anyone who's not already an Israeli apologist.

Unequal? You mean like the US and the Taliban? A war in which plenty of children were also killed as collateral damage.
You seem to think these deaths are avoidable by Israel. What do you think Israel should do to make that happen I mean other than surrender to Hamas.

Do we have a common border with Afghanistan?

Israel isn't even making a real attempt to avoid civilian casualties as both the death toll and their locations prove.

How do you know they are not. You aren't there.

 

[Mustang]

Unequal? You mean like the US and the Taliban? A war in which plenty of children were also killed as collateral damage.
You seem to think these deaths are avoidable by Israel. What do you think Israel should do to make that happen I mean other than surrender to Hamas.

Do we have a common border with Afghanistan?

Israel isn't even making a real attempt to avoid civilian casualties as both the death toll and their locations prove.

How do you know they are not. You aren't there.

I could ask the same thing about you. However, the deaths speak volumes all by themselves.

 

[LoneLaugher]

Have some free time? Watch this.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=3ux4JU_sbB0